Father of Waters

A part of my daily practice, believe it or not, is my drive to and from work. I have a choice of routes, but I always drive along the fey-populated Spout Run and the beautiful river into which it feeds, the Potomac. Batty old woman that I am, I find myself in deep relationship with the water, the rocks, the honeysuckle that's thriving just now, the runners and early-morning kayakers on the Potomac, the expanding colony of purple thistles just as you exit onto the T.R. Bridge, the homeless vet I chat with there most mornings, the dead trees just at the edge of the island facing the Kennedy Center. It's a good thing that traffic moves at a crawl.

As I was driving beside the Potomac this morning, NPR was reporting on the flooding that's been happening alongside the Mississippi River and its tributaries. "Mississippi" comes from a Native American word that meant, "Father of Waters," and it was aptly named.

I simply can't imagine how much water it would take to do what the news reports describe, nor how it would be to live -- as a human, a tree, a bird with a nest in that tree, a snake, a fox, or a rose bush -- within that flood plain. One thing that rivers do, that rivers need to do, is to flood.

And so my sympathies are with the Mississippi and with the Element that I call every day when I cast a circle, every time that I need something to dissolve, every time that I need things to flow along. And, as well, my sympathies are with the humans, and the trees, and the birds, and the snakes, and the foxes, and the roses.

Because they are all the same thing; they are all, to paraphrase HC, Goddess pouring Goddess into Goddess. And, yet, they are each separate and precious, and the desire of the human not to lose her home, and the desire of the fox kit not to lose her den, and the desire of the tree not to be swept away, are every bit as strong and as valid as the desire of the Mississippi to occasionally overflow His banks in a big way.

And so, tonight, I will sit at my altar, here in the district devoted to the Goddess Columbia, here beside Spout Run, here in the Potomac Watershed, and I will light incense for the Father of Waters and for all who live in His floodplain. I will send energy to strengthen the Web of All. I will listen to the words of Derrick Jensen, and I will be more grateful than I can express for having incarnated upon this watery, dangerous planet.

Join me at your altar, will you?

Serendipity

There's this:

Premises 1 through 10

and, this:

As the current round of catabolism picks up speed, a great many jobs will go away, and most of them will never return; a great many people who depend on those jobs will descend into poverty, and most of them will never rise back out of it; much of the familiar fabric of life in America as it’s been lived in recent decades will be shredded beyond repair, and new and far less lavish patterns will emerge instead; outside the narrowing circle of the privileged classes, even those who maintain relative affluence will be making do with much less than they or their equivalents do today. All these are ways that a society in decline successfully adapts to the contraction of its economic base and the mismatch between available resources and maintenance costs.

Twenty or thirty or forty years from now, in turn, it’s a fairly safe bet that the years of crisis will come to a close and a newly optimistic America will reassure itself that everything really is all right again. The odds are pretty high that by then it will be, for all practical purposes, a Third World nation, with little more than dim memories remaining from its former empire or its erstwhile status as a superpower; it’s not at all impossible, for that matter, that it will be more than one nation, split asunder along lines traced out by today’s increasingly uncompromising culture wars. Fast forward another few decades, and another round of crises arrives, followed by another respite, and another round of crises, until finally peasant farmers plow their fields in sight of the crumbling ruins of our cities.

That’s the way civilizations end, and that’s the way ours is ending.

The Arch Druid and Derrick Jensen have more.

Picture found here.

Well, Ignoring the Problem Doesn't Seem to Be Working

My New Name For A Blog

What Echidne of the Snakes Said.

Picture found here.

Carrying Capacity

My New Name For A Blog

What Ericka Said.

It's just another indication of how far we have to go: how free "good liberals" felt to rip Sarah Palin a new one over her child bearing choices. And, trust me, I'd have probably agreed w/ Son and DiL and moved to Ireland if Palin had been elected. There were a million and one policy reasons to want Palin to lose the election. Yet a great way to get yourself blasted on a number of v liberal blogs was to suggest that if Palin wanted to deliver her Downs Syndrome baby in Alaska, that was her choice.

But everyone in America, and I mean everyone, feels free to criticize women for their reproductive choices. Why? It's a way to keep women down and fighting w each other instead of fighting together against patriarchy. The "helicopter moms" can feel superior to the woman who gives birth blackberry-in-hand, and the women who choose not to have children can spend their lives explaining their choice to relatives who think those women are "selfish." Women who breast feed can look down on women who don't, and women who don't have a second child can spend their lives explaining why they "denied" their child a sibling. No matter what reproductive or child-rearing choice a woman makes, someone, somewhere, can criticize her for it. It's interesting how this sort of criticism always seems to focus on the woman, isn't it?

As Ericka notes, the latest target is a woman who gave birth this week to octuplets. I'm a huge advocate of population control and I'd probably go along with measures to remove the "tragedy of the commons effect" of big families that would give a lot of liberals pause. I think that we should, at the least, be doing everything that we can, educationally, socially, etc. to convince people to limit the size of their families. I can almost, in the words of the song, hear the planet groan every time it registers another birth.

But choice means choice. If society and the government can tell me not to have more children when I'm poor or whatever, then they can tell me to have more children than I want if that's what the government -- which we've all seen is way too vulnerable to take-over by Christianists -- decides that it wants to do.

And I refuse to engage in the game of tearing down and criticizing another woman --whatever her religion, politics, financial situation, class, etc. -- for her reproductive choices. I want to support other women, not tear them down. Shawna Carol's lyrics:

"When you look in your sister's eyes,
Praise her, praise her,
For she's been laid down
For centuries, "

ring v true for me. We'd be a lot better off if all the energy devoted to hating on this woman went into changing the pressures that society puts on women to make them believe they're incomplete w/o a baby.

And, requisite disclosure: I love kids. I had one who is, still, 35 years later, the absolute best thing that ever happened to me in a life blessed every day by mystical joy I don't even know how to describe, a great career, financial success, a circle of amazing witches, poetry, art, gardening, tea, and great and good friends. (Perhaps part of my great commitment to choice is the realization that many would have said that, at 17, uneducated, spinning out from a dysfunctional family, poor, I shouldn't have been allowed to bear. Yet Son turned out to be a wonderful, kind, caring man with a sparkling sense of humor. He's a wonderful lawyer who does amazing pro bono work and complex litigation. He got an Ivy League education and married a wonderful woman and lawyer. My reproductive choice was better left to me; how can I say less for any other woman?) Spending time with his son is the absolute high point of every week for me and I've been looking forward all week to taking him to the nature center and library tomorrow. I was at a sister-witch's house on Sunday and playing with her bright three-year-old. When I said that I had to leave to go to work he said, "But I will miss you!" and snuggled up next to me. All week, I've remembered that moment fondly when I was pulling all-nighters at work or slogging through the ice and snow. It's possible, really it is, to, at the same time: love kids, want there to be fewer of them, and support other women in their reproductive choices, even if I wouldn't have made the same choice.

So, What Ericka Said.


Picture by Anne Geddes found here.

My New Name For A Blog

What the Snake Goddess said.

Too many people. Not enough planet. Evolve or perish.

The Gift Outright

Take Your Abstinence "Education" Program And Shove It

This one's for my wonderful and determined friend, R., who spent last week working on this issue for Virginia.

Today's WaPo reports the good news that:

The number of states refusing federal money for "abstinence-only" sex education programs jumped sharply in the past year as evidence mounted that the approach is ineffective.

At least 14 states have either notified the federal government that they will no longer be requesting the funds or are not expected to apply, forgoing more than $15 million of the $50 million available, officials said. Virginia was the most recent state to opt out.

Thank the Goddess. The only surprising thing is that anyone rational ever imagined that this twaddle could be effective.

Despite intense (and, ask my friend, R., it's really, really intense and nasty) lobbying by fundie whackjobs and xianists, the trend is likely to continue.

"This wave of states rejecting the money is a bellwether," said William Smith of the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States, a Washington-based advocacy and education group that opposes abstinence-only programs. "It's a canary in the coal mine of what's to come."

"We hope that it sends a message to the politicians in Washington that this program needs to change, and states need to be able to craft a program that is the best fit for their young people and that is not a dictated by Washington ideologues," Smith said.

Smith and other critics said they hoped that if enough states drop out, Congress will redirect the funding to comprehensive sex education programs that include teaching about the use of condoms and other contraceptives.

"I think this could be the straw that breaks the camel's back in terms of continued funding of these programs," said John Wagoner of Advocates for Youth, another Washington advocacy group. "How can they ignore so many states slapping a return-to-sender label on this funding?"

I hate abstinence "education" programs for a number of reasons. First, of course, they're ineffective. Telling teenagers, with hormones coursing through their body designed specifically to make them want to have sex is about as effective as telling hungry dieters to just not eat or telling thirsty people not to drink. Sex is a natural biological function and our bodies are made to want it, just as they want air, and food, and water. Throw in a hyper-sexualized society, where 12-year-old girls dress like supermodels and sex is used to sell everything from beer to cars to, well, Viagara and you've got to be on dope to think that telling kids not to have sex = sex education. And the results show that abstinence "education" is lots less effective at preventing teen pregnancy than, oh, say, teaching kids how to use condoms and passing them out to kids every chance we get.

In addition, federal health officials reported last week that a 14-year drop in teenage pregnancy rates appeared to have reversed.

"This abstinence-only program is just not getting the job done," said Cecile Richards of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America. "This is a ideologically based program that doesn't have any support in science."

Second, I just reject the notion that we should be giving teenagers the message that there's something wrong with sex. There isn't. Sex is great. Teen pregnancy and sexually-transmitted diseases are the problems. So let's teach kids how to prevent those. Consider another natural function that we're wired to want to do: eating. We don't tell kids not to eat until they get married. Eating isn't the problem; eating is great. Obesity and poor nutrition are the problems. So we have health classes and phys ed classes and science classes and home ec classes to teach kids how to eat and cook healthy food.

Third, and this is related to the second reason, the notion that sex is a problem and should be avoided (at least for now) is a religiously-based idea. My religion doesn't agree. Teaching abstinence almost always slips over into indoctrinating kids into, if not outright xianity, into ideas introduced into this culture by xianity that are directly antithecal to, say, my religion. Xians can tell their own kids, in their own homes, how terrible sex is and why they should avoid it. Public schools should provide information: if you have sex, here's what could happen and here's how to avoid that.

My own Democratic governor, Tim Kaine, in spite of being a devout Catholic, recently added Virginia to the states telling the fundie whackjobs installed by the Bush junta to go pound sand.

"The governor has often stated that abstinence-only education does not show any results," said Gordon Hickey, a spokesman for Virginia Gov. Timothy M. Kaine (D), who announced plans to give up the funding last month. "It doesn't work. He's a firm believer in more comprehensive sex education."

Anyone who thinks that state elections don't matter can simply consider whether this would have happened if Jerry Kilgore had won in 2005.

Even more conservative politicians are getting off the abstinence merry-go-round:

"Why would we spend tax dollars on something that doesn't work?" asked Ned Calonge of the Colorado Department of Health and Environment. "That doesn't make sense to me. Philosophically, I am opposed to spending government dollars on something that's ineffective. That's just irresponsible."

The reasons given for passing up the federal money vary from state to state. Some governors publicly repudiated the programs. Others quietly let their applications lapse or blamed tight budgets that made it impossible to meet the requirement to provide matching state funds. Still others are asking for more flexibility.

"The governor supports abstinence education," Keith Daily, a spokesman for Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland (D). "What he does not support is abstinence- only education. We are asking to put the money toward abstinence in the context of a comprehensive age-appropriate curriculum."

Most of the battles on the state level are being fought by local affiliates supported by national groups. In Illinois, opponents are planning to launch a campaign next month involving more than 100 state groups to try to sway the governor and state legislature to forgo about $1.8 million in funding.

"These programs are dangerous," said Jonathan Stacks of the Illinois Caucus for Adolescent Health. "We're trying to get people across the state to raise their voice on this issue. I think once those voices are heard, the legislature and the governor won't have any choice but to back the will of the voters."

Not a minute too soon. Go, R.!

Ruh Roh!

From today's EEI newsletter:

International Energy Agency Forecasts Big Jump in GHG Emissions

The International Energy Agency's World Energy Outlook 2007 report shows that GHG emissions are expected to surge by 2030, potentially causing a rise in global temperatures of at least 5.4 degrees and bringing along with that flooding and disease, Bloomberg reported. To keep temperature increases below that mark would need "exceptionally vigorous policy action," the report said, adding: "A later peak and less-sharp reductions in emissions would lead to higher concentrations and bigger increases in temperature."

To limit the surge in GHG emissions, the report found that the cost of building new electricity generating capacity would be "very high," with cumulative investments through 2030 at least $1.8 trillion higher than a scenario in which emissions were allowed to rise significantly. The report said: "Early retirement of fossil-fuel generating capacity will comprise almost $1 trillion of the additional investment."

The IEA said China's emissions were likely to more than double to 11.4 billion tons by 2030, largely as a result of increased coal-based power generation. Wrote Bloomberg: "Carbon dioxide output from fuel combustion could peak around 2025, with China probably overtaking the U.S. this year as the world's biggest emitter." China and India together could account for 56 percent of emissions growth, Bloomberg reported.
Bloomberg , Nov. 7.

Some Sanity In A World Of "Abstinence Education"

Good. Let's hope that other schools will follow. What's the point to denying children the medical care that they need? Who thinks that it's a better option to let middle school kids conceive babies? As for the "parents' rights," parents can exercise their rights by staying involved with their kids' lives and supervising their kids. But they don't have a "right" to foist unwanted babies and sexual diseases onto their kids or the rest of us.

Two Hundred Species A Day

Too Many People

From today's NYT: Studies by different scientists have concluded that the rising water demands in the North China Plain make it unfeasible for farmers to continue planting a winter crop.

You might want to stop for a minute or two and just think about what that means.

Calling Water In The West

There's a fascinating article in today's NYT about what happens when you mess with the environment.

In Australia, where a fence built to keep rabbits out of farmland clearly divides crops from native vegetation, scientists have observed a strange phenomenon: above the native vegetation, the sky is rich in rain-producing clouds. But the sky on the farmland side is clear.

Researchers led by Tom Lyons of Murdoch University in Australia and Udaysankar S. Nair of the University of Alabama in Huntsville have come up with three possible explanations for this difference in cloudiness.

One theory is that the dark native vegetation absorbs and releases more heat into the atmosphere than the light-colored crops. These native plants release heat that combines with water vapor from the lower atmosphere, resulting in cloud formation.

Another hypothesis is that the warmer air on the native scrubland rises, creating a vacuum in the lower atmosphere that is then filled by cooler air from cropland across the fence. As a result, clouds form on the scrubland side.

A third idea is that a high concentration of aerosols — particles suspended in the atmosphere — on the agricultural side results in small water droplets and a decrease in the probability of rainfall. On the native landscape, the concentration of aerosols is lower, translating into larger droplets and more rainfall.

My theory is that the fairies and devas of the native vegetation call the rain clouds and, when you destroy the native vegetation, you chase them away, as well. But that's probably just a more complete and complex way of saying that all of the scientists' theories probably play some role in this phenomenon without explaining the gestalt of it. This study has huge implications for issues such as biofuels (bad) and the level of sustainable human population that this planet can manage.

Of course, it's particularly ironic that rabbits were introduced to Australia by people who gave almost no thought to the unintended consequences.

Hat tip to Culture of Truth in comments at Eschaton.

Update: Aqulia ka Hecate has a post up about the relationship between magic and "natural" explanations, as well.

Condom Ads Rejected

My brilliant friend, E., alerted me to this:

WITH CONDOMS IN PARTICULAR, LOCAL STATIONS CAN SAY NO

[SOURCE: New York Times, AUTHOR: Andrew Adam Newman]

Controversy over a new advertising campaign by Trojan, the condom maker, has trickled down to the local level, with television stations in Pittsburgh roundly refusing to show it, and stations in Seattle giving it the green light. When Trojan introduced the condom commercial last month, it was rejected as national advertising by both CBS and Fox. Fox said it objected to the message that condoms can prevent pregnancy, while CBS said it was not "appropriate," drawing a firestorm of criticism from public health advocates and bloggers. But Trojan, which is owned by Church & Dwight and a private equity firm, Kelso & Company, was in for more unhappy surprises last week. Local affiliates in Pittsburgh for ABC and NBC, two networks that had agreed to run the ad nationally, also snubbed it. The odd effect of these decisions will be that viewers in the Pittsburgh area will be able to see the commercials during national advertising slots on ABC or NBC — if with less frequency. Stations sell their own commercial slots as well, to local and national advertisers, and the ads are subject to local review even if they pass muster with networks.

E. adds: OK, the thing that's the WACKIEST here is that Fox objects to the ads because they claim "that condoms can prevent pregnancy" UM, EXCUSE ME, BUT WHETHER YOU LIKE IT OR NOT, CONDOMS DO IN FACT PREVENT PREGNANCY YOU MORONS.

Jeebus!

What E. said.

There's Your Immediate Problem And Then There's Your Underlying Problem.

Although there will clearly some day be far fewer humans than there are at present, there are many ways [that] this reduction in population may occur (or be achieved, depending on the passivity or activity with which we choose to approach this transformation). Some [such ways would involve] extreme violence and privation: nuclear Armageddon, for example, would reduce both population and consumption, yet do so horrifically; the same would be true for a continuation of over-shoot, followed by a crash. Other ways could be characterized by less violence. . . . Personally and collectively we may be able to both reduce the amount and soften the character of violence that occurs during this ongoing and perhaps long-term shift. Or we may not. But this much is certain: if we do not approach it actively -- if we do not talk about our predicament, and what we are going to do about it -- the violence will almost undoubtedly be far more severe, the privation more extreme.

~Derrick Jensen, Endgame, Volume I: The Problem of Civilization


Jensen argues that: [P]opulation is by no means [the] primary [problem that we face today]. It's not even secondary or tertiary. First, there's the question of resource consumption. . . . Second is the failure to accept limits, of which overpopulation and overconsumption are merely two linked symptoms. Beneath that [are] our belief[s] [that] we're not animals, that we're separate from the rest of the world, that we're exempt from the negative consequences of our actions, and that we're exempt from death. Beneath these beliefs is a fear and loathing of the body, of the wild and uncontrollable nature of existence itself, and ultimately of death. These fears cause us to convince ourselves not only of the possibility but the desirability of not being animals, of separating ourselves from the world. These fears drive us crazy and lead us to create and implement insane and destructive economic and social systems.

Id.

I'd agree with Jensen that the beliefs that he describes are what have led to overpopulation. But I disagree with him that overpopulation isn't our primary problem at the moment. When a teenager is driving a speeding car straight into a ditch, stopping the car before the teenager drives it into the ditch IS your number one problem. Once you get the car stopped, you can work on the underlying beliefs that made the teenager think it would be ok to drink and drive and speed and joyride. And you do need to address those underlying beliefs. But, first, you need to stop the car. A dead teenager can't change her beliefs, can't adopt new ways of existing in the world.

I also agree with Jenses that the current level of population is completely unsustainable and will, one way or another, be reduced dramatically, I'd say over the course of the next century. We can do this the painful way or the really painful way. Change is often painful. I'd, however, prefer the merely painful to the really painful. I'd prefer a huge campaign to convince people to limit reproduction voluntarily, along with a huge emphasis on making birth control free, accessible, safe, and effective, along with a huge emphasis -- worldwide -- on education and equal rights for women (all of which have been shown to be able to reduce population), followed by increasingly severe taxes on those who still choose to burden the world with their unrealistic reproductive choices -- an internalization of the costs, if you will. I'd prefer even more restrictive measures to nuclear war or environmental Armageddon, which is where we're headed if we continue to ignore the population elephant in the living room. As Jensen says: [T]his much is certain: if we do not approach it actively -- if we do not talk about our predicament, and what we are going to do about it -- the violence will almost undoubtedly be far more severe, the privation more extreme.

Finally, I'll note that it was witchcraft's rejection of so many of the underlying beliefs that Jensen abhors -- that we're separate from nature, that women's bodies and the wild Earth are to be abhorred and controlled, that death isn't every much a part of this whole WHOLE as is life -- that led me to realize that I was a witch. Those beliefs spring from, sustain, and reinforce patriarchy. I'd call them the underlying problem and perhaps Jensen would agree.

The Stupid! It Burns!

It's true. Jonah Goldberg is, in fact, the stupidest man in the world. His father, after all mated with Lucianne.

Save The Cape Griffon Vultures

Both Anne and Aquilla have up fascinating posts about efforts underway to save the Cape Griffon Vulture. There are only a few thousand known Cape Griffon Vultures left in the world. The population in Namibia is down to a mere eleven birds. The species is on the knife-edge of extinction due, primarily, to being poisoned (often as a result of eating the carcasses of animals that were poisoned), disturbance of its, breeding colonies, and electrocution. Which is to say, human overpopulation is killing off the birds much faster than they can breed.

Aquila explains that the birds mate for life and that each pair: lay and nurture a single egg, and the chick-adult bonding is strong . . . . But if this chick doesn't make it into a healthy, rickets-free adult, there are Going To Be Consequences.


The Rare and Endangered Species Trust (REST) is doing amazing work to try and save these gorgeous and ecologically-important birds. I don't run an annual request for funds, as do some other blogs. Blogging is a hobby for me and, knock on wood, there's enough money in the piggy bank at the end of the month to buy kitty treats for Miss Thing and olives for my martini. But if you read and enjoy this blog, and if you have a few dollars to spare, I would like to ask you to make a donation to REST to support their efforts to save the Cape Griffon Vultures. Let me know in comments that you made a donation and I'll gladly give you a two-card tarot reading in thanks.

Eli Whitney Debevoise II. I Swear That I Am Not Making That Up

Today's WaPo has an article about a leaked World Bank report showing that Wolfowitz broke bank rules -- clearly the World Bank still thinks that it can shame Wolfowitz into resigning. They can't; he's George Bush's man and Bush's men apparently are incapable of shame. See, e.g., Alberto Gonzales. You can have their jobs from them when you pry them from their cold, dead hands. An option which becomes more attractive by the minute.

But what really struck me was this:

Monday was also shaping up as a test of the board's will on a controversial new bank strategy on health, nutrition and population.

In recent months, World Bank employees have shaped the strategy, which directs the institution's lending, to include the ready availability of "sexual and reproductive health services" for women in poor countries. That bit of jargon is widely known in some countries to refer, among other things, to access to safe and legal abortions.

But in recent weeks, Juan Jose Daboub, a conservative Christian whom Wolfowitz appointed managing director at the bank, directed the staff to delete that reference, effectively eliminating the endorsement for access to safe abortions, according to two bank officials. Daboub did not return calls.

In a letter sent last week to the bank vice president overseeing the strategy, several members of the governing board, including those representing Germany, France and Britain, demanded that the original language be restored, asserting that the bank would otherwise be breaking with a 1994 consensus embracing family planning.

This week, the American representative on the board, Eli Whitney Debevoise II, pressed again to remove the reference to "services" and replace it with "care," to eliminate any potential endorsement for abortion, the officials said. Debevoise did not return phone calls.


That's who that cowboy, that good ole' boy with whom you'd just love to sit down and have a beer, that man of the people who saved us from that elitist John Kerry, George Bush appointed to be the American representative to the governing board of the World Bank: Eli Whitney Debevoise II. And that's who gets to decide that some poor woman living in a shack in Africa or India or South America will have to bear one more child than she can care for, or feed, or even carry to term. Eli Whitney Debevoise II.

Young Mr. Debevoise comes from, well, shall we say, circumstances that were significantly removed from those of a poor, pregnant woman living in the Third World. The first Mr. Eli Whitney Debevoise (1899-1990) co-founded the New York law firm of Debevoise & Stevenson (later Debevoise & Plimpton) in 1931. During World War II he served as chairman of an Alien Enemy Hearing Board in New York City, where he ruled on the eligibility of aliens to remain in the country during the war. From 1950 to 1953 he was appointed deputy general counsel with the High Commission for Germany - Office of General Counsel (HICOG-OGC). His namesake, after spending time at Yale and Harvard, became a partner at Arnold & Porter. He testified just last month that he was eager for the great privilege and the responsibility to represent the United States at the World Bank Group institutions.

Hey, who could possibly be in a better position to decide what's good for Third World women? Please. Shoot me now.

A Witch's Work

I live in Northern Virginia, where a not inconsequential number of kids wind up going to Virginia Tech. Driving home tonight, I passed several xian churches that had signs up saying: "Prayer Service for Virginia Tech. Tonight 7:30" or words to that effect. It seems to me that there are times when the organized churches do a better job of this sort of instant response stuff than do our disorganized Pagan selves, although, Goddess knows that our disorganization is one of the things that I most love about us.

Someone once said that a witch's job is to help to turn the wheel, and round and round the wheel must turn. Someone who understands how to do it (and who has the training to do it) needs to get on those grounds sometime soon and do the necessary energy work. Witches all over the place need to send healing to the school, the students, the families, the souls of those who one minute were sitting in class and the next minute were bodyless. We all need to be doing more, on both a mundane and a magical level, to decrease the level of violence in this overcrowded, over-armed, partiarchy.

And, while it's true that, for example, more than thirty people die everyday all over America (hell, probably just all over Virginia) due to environmental pollution, it's still so shocking to us when one of these outbreaks of madness kills so many, all together, at one time.

Ground. Breathe. Ground again. Breathe again. Light some incense. Ritual tonight at 7:30.